Ravyn
New Member
Yes,that makes alot of sense...For this is RDI both are in on it and to find out who I doubt we will ever know for sure cause we still be wondering really which one...
Still Asking Questions Here
- Thread starter Ravyn
- Start date
Yes,that makes alot of sense...For this is RDI both are in on it and to find out who I doubt we will ever know for sure cause we still be wondering really which one...
Sure. I know what you mean.
Det. Arndt was trained as a rape victim specialist. She was naturally predisposed to view women sympathetically. I think she viewed Patsy as the victim here, especially before JB was found. Then, with JR's snake-like demeanor and smarmy lip-licking sleaziness, not to mention his suspicious behavior that day, she formed the opinion as soon as he found JB that he had killed his daughter.
Ravyn
New Member
Then we have Lou Smit with his experience believing the parents guilty in the beginning so every LE including FBI says the parents and also top notch experts but yet they walk free....
Ravyn
New Member
You have a good point there but I still like to know other than talking to the Ramsey what made him think first that the parents did this.....What did he see in the beginning...And who was he really looking at this crime...
madeleine
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2008
- Messages
- 4,972
- Reaction score
- 88
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0105/28/lkl.00.html
SMIT: Yes, I did. I felt, perhaps at first, I leaned toward the parents doing it, only because of what I had read and what I had seen on television. But as I got into the case, I started seeing red flags, which started pointing the other way. And I did bring that up to the police department and also to the district attorney's office.
huh???????the great experienced detective based his first opinions on what he read in the media?
GMAB Lou!
SMIT: Yes, I did. I felt, perhaps at first, I leaned toward the parents doing it, only because of what I had read and what I had seen on television. But as I got into the case, I started seeing red flags, which started pointing the other way. And I did bring that up to the police department and also to the district attorney's office.
huh???????the great experienced detective based his first opinions on what he read in the media?
GMAB Lou!
Ravyn
New Member
Going by the media great but was everyone just forget the redflags they was seeing just because of what he started seeing ...
I have found that his reputation is somewhat inflated.
Ravyn
New Member
Did Lou Smit quit the R's or still helping JR...I read different things here so I'm just wondering....
madeleine
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2008
- Messages
- 4,972
- Reaction score
- 88
Well he said he will never quit as long as he lives bla bla bla but I don't think he's still investigating......imo
Investigate what and who btw?He did his job,he came up with a defence theory.The R's were exonerated.No need to push the IDI theory anymore.
Investigate what and who btw?He did his job,he came up with a defence theory.The R's were exonerated.No need to push the IDI theory anymore.
Not that it relates to anything, but I have a question.
I've often wondered if PR ever asked what happens to murdering mothers in prison. Just to clarify: if I were in her position, even if I WERE innocent, I would ask that.
I've often wondered if PR ever asked what happens to murdering mothers in prison. Just to clarify: if I were in her position, even if I WERE innocent, I would ask that.
Ravyn
New Member
You know, I think that what I would be wondering too...So yes,I think she did ask that or nothing else thought about it...
Ravyn
New Member
When was the last time MR was at the Colorado house....And does anyone knows when that Chistmas photo of the family taken to sent to family and friends....
Ravyn
New Member
Now I have read that JR's friend that is an attorney retained the lawyers for the R's...So why would he do this if he didn't know something....And in 48 hours how can they say they was being targeted by the LE.....Unless they was guilty or had inside information to everything going on....
Sophie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2009
- Messages
- 1,033
- Reaction score
- 106
Just spotted this, Dave. It is an interesting question and one that - given her anecdotal familiarity with the Susan Smith case, for example - has to have occurred to her.
Sophie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2009
- Messages
- 1,033
- Reaction score
- 106
See Ravyn, that's something that lies at the very heart of this case. Ramsey apologists will tell you that people like the Ramseys and their entourage will instinctively get in the lawyers whatever ills befall them. This may be true. However, we know that John was a total take-charge control freak (in fact, imo, Patsy evinces some resentment of this in DoI) who made decisions (eg. like trying to organise a flight to Atlanta minutes after JBR had been found). It just doesn't fit what we know of John that he would have just taken on board everything the lawyers were suggesting if he didn't agree with it).
Not only is that the problem- that is the ANSWER. There was something to hide here. The body of their child held a secret. The secret would have exposed abuse. A parent who accidentally kills their child calls 911 first, not last. A parent who kills their child accidentally in a rage attack should still call 911 first. But these parents called their lawyers. To cover this up and stage this elaborate and conflicting crime scene is cowardice of the worst kind. And the friends/lawyers who helped them do this are not only cowards but criminals as much as the killers are.